Forum Ratings

[Slynky]

Whew, just spent half an hour trying to re-rate all the people I had rated before. Tough on the old memory banks, if you know what I mean [img]/threads/images/Graemlins/crazy.gif[/img].

I'm sure I missed some of the people I had rated before so don't get alarmed if it looks like I "snubbed" you...I probably didn't find a thread with your name in it (yet), and you weren't Online. (and I'm not about to go through the User List )

BTW, my reason to give forum Ratings are based on forum ettiquette, skill in the game, contributions to the game, contributions to the forum, assistance to others, good sportsmanship, and humor. Probably some other stuff that I use as a guide that I can't think of now that I'm actually writing this message .

[Fyron]

Not to rain on your parade Slynky, but... Forum Ratings are 99.9% useless without comments to go along with them (even anonymous comments...) AND without the ability to later change your rating of a person. The current system should be disabled entirely... It really boils down to a high school-mentality popularity contest, which means nothing...

[Slynky]

Wouldn't be the first time we've disagreed (nor the first time I've been to a parade that got rained on ).

I think they serve a purpose and I believe the professionals wouldn't have included them in so many "forum" apps if they didn't believe it as well.

I think it encourages appropriate behavior in forums. I think it provides a (small) way to say "thanks" for things that people have done in the forums/games. And to say "thanks" for assistance with other things. And, I believe it's a way to say "thanks" to people for spreading a little humor and for weighing in to threads to help people who are experiencing problems in their life.

Though it might be a popularity contest (in some ways), a quick look around shows that people like Geo, for instance, didn't have over 80 people rate him because he was popular but because of what he gave to the forum and the game.

Just an opinion.

[Fyron]

Most "professionals" just include the feature because other forum packages include it and they need to remain competitive... Also, just because a "professional" does something does not mean it is a good idea.

Ratings as they commonly are give a very poor first impression. There are a lot of people that deserve to have 80 five star Ratings, but instead have only 1 or 2, or even none. Additionally, many times people rate others based on disagreements with their point of view... You post something they don't agree with, they give you a 1. Doesn't matter how nice or helpful they are. How does this help?

What if someone starts off rude and annoying, so you give them a 1, but later they amend their ways and become a major contributer? What if someone has a bunch of 5 star Ratings, but then they become an elitist jerk? Either way, you can't change your rating of them, because it is permanent.

Further, the 5 star rating system is trivial. How do you determine the difference between a 4 and 5? A 3 and 4? Who really goes and gives out Ratings other than a 1 or a 5? Not many... What exactly does a 4 mean? Or a 5? Or a 3? If there was a mandatory comment for every rating, the values might actually have some weight... as it is, it might as well just be "good" or "bad", and not have 5 different meaningless possibilities...

Certainly, there are a few useful features of the rating system, hence the 0.1% usefulness I attributed to it... There are just too many negatives of the Ratings system. You can say thanks to someone by sending them a private message or making a forum post. Ratings are not necessary, for anything. The only purpose they serve is to bias the impressions of new forum members, for good or ill.

[Slynky]

Oh, I never said it was a perfect system. And certainly, the permanency of a rating is one of them you correctly pointed out.

All I can say is that Ratings (like statistics) average out over time on the predication that most people aren't vindictive and are generally objective.

Certainly, I've looked at a few Ratings that were low and wondered why so. Doesn't mean I "write" those people off, especially if I've never seen any reason for it. I understand your point, though, and I see how some might automatically assume someone is a jerk due to a rating of 3 (out of, say, just 2 votes). On the other hand, if one sees a rating of 1.2 (out of 15 votes) for someone, it seems more obvious it's not just the opinion of just a few people who got upset on a bad day.

To date, I can say the Ratings I have given people have not needed to be changed (due to some wild fluctuation in their actions).

And even though we (seem to) disagree a lot, you rate a 5-star with me (so THERE! ).

[Joachim]

I tend to share Fyron's perspective on this... But, here is a different suggestion that should be easy with great artists like DEG around.

We should have little icons that go under our avatars that indicate various contributions to the community. Here are a few ideas, and I am sure everyone can come up with some more.

Mod maker - some funky icon
Ship artist - paint brush?
Web site owner - ??
PBW hosts -
PBW donor - Mineral symbol/supply symbol?

These should be voted on, if you get a certain number of votes then:
Great Game host
Nice guy
Newb helper
good strategist
mod advisor

So what do people think?

[Atrocities]

I have no opinion.